Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This communication is a Final Office Action in response to Applicant’s amendment for application number 18/889,654 received on 02/19/2026.
In accordance with Applicant’s amendment, claims 1, 3-14, and 16-20 are amended, currently pending and have been examined. Claims 2 and 15 have been canceled.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection set forth in this Office Action.
Upon review of amendment, the 101 rejections previously applied to the claims are withdrawn.
Upon review of amendments, the 103 rejection previously applied to claim 13 is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Response to §103 arguments – Applicant’s arguments with respect to the §103 rejections previously applied to claims 1, 4-12, 14, and 16-20 are raised in support of the amendments to the claims. The amendments and supporting arguments are believed to be fully addressed in the updated §103 rejections below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
The term “proximate” in claims 1, 13, 14, and 20 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “proximate” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Claims 4-12, and 16-19 inherit the deficiency from their parent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3, 10, 11, 14, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novak et al. (WO 2024031156 A1, hereinafter “Novak”), in view of Lewis et al. (US 20210164954 A1, hereinafter “Lewis”), in further view of Johnson (US 4597360 A, hereinafter “Johnson”).
Regarding claims 1/14/20: Novak teaches a method ([0001] the disclosure concerns a method and system for bringing about efficient and environmentally safe transfer of water between water zones, and the application of transferred water toward localised cooling, fertilisation, increases in primary production and in carbon sequestration.), a computer program product ([0017] Another object is to provide an upwelling or downwelling device which is computer operated), and a computer system ([0001] the disclosure concerns a method and system for bringing about efficient and environmentally safe transfer of water between water zones, and the application of transferred water toward localised cooling, fertilisation, increases in primary production and in carbon sequestration.) with limitations for:
analyzing, to determine a value of a chemical compound, first sensor data to determine a density of the chemical compound, ([0048] The present disclosure relates to a data gathering, water conditioning system in which water is transferred between first and second differentiable zones of water in an open water environment such as an ocean, sea, lake or large dam. The zones may be differentiated by physical properties such as temperature, density or current speed, or by chemical composition, for example nutrient content and concentrations of particular nutrients, or by the presence of different micro-organisms, such as phytoplankton. The presence of suitable nutrients helps maintain the food chain; [0053] As noted above, the differentiating characteristics of surface layer 12 compared with surface layer surrounding it may, without limitation, include temperature, density, chemical components such as nutrients and the like. The resulting altered condition of the water in surface layer 12 is favourable for promoting healthy development and growth of aquatic species found within or introduced into this layer. The aquatic species may, without limitation, include primary producers such as fish. The chemical species that may be transported with the upwelling or downwelling water include without limitation chlorophyll a (or “Chi a”, the universal proxy for phytoplankton biomass), dissolved oxygen, carbon, calcium, phosphate, nitrates and species influencing acidity (as measured in terms of pH). [0054] The VTDs, functioning as ALIPs, and having on-board sensors for collecting data in relation to species such as those mentioned above, will be discussed in more detail with reference to Figure 2. The sensors provide continuous or discrete outputs.);
wherein the chemical compound is emitted from a candidate underwater source in a water body ([004] Nutrients supplying food for phytoplankton, fish and other marine life are delivered from a water layer referred to as the thermocline layer.;
where a floating farm is operating; ([Figure 1] is a schematic diagram in perspective view of an aquatic garden of the invention making use of artificial upwelling.);
the first set of instructions cause activation of a propulsion component of the upwelling apparatus to relocate the upwelling apparatus to the submerged location ([0046] In order to facilitate understanding of the present invention, reference is made to the accompanying drawings, in which a preferred embodiment is illustrated. Thus: Figure 1 is a schematic diagram in perspective view of an aquatic garden of the invention making use of artificial upwelling.; [0030] Preferably, the computer is programmed for navigating the VTD by causing adjustment in the length of the tube.; [0032] In an embodiment, the VTD is navigable by means of a computer- operable directional control surface being deployed or orientated in the water or air according to programmed instructions.; [0037] According to a third aspect of this disclosure, there is provided a method of oceanic carbon capture including: a. Providing a VTD having a floating superstructure supporting an upwelling tube of adjustable length; b. locating the VTD in a body of open water; c. operating the VTD to capture and/or receive data relating to the biochemistry of the body of water and to water current directions and speeds; d. responsive to said data, identifying a target zone of water to which to relocate the VTD; e. adjusting the length of the tube thereby to steer the VTD to the target zone using a prevailing current; and f. causing upwelling of water from the zone, for altering the nutrient profile in the target zone and capturing atmospheric carbon compounds at the air/water interface);
and cause activation of a pumping component of the upwelling apparatus to perform an upwelling movement of water containing the chemical compound from the candidate underwater source toward the floating farm; ([0017] Another object is to provide an upwelling or downwelling device which is computer operated and the operation of which is programmable from a combination of onshore instructions, incoming sensed data and algorithms including but not limited to algorithms generated by artificial intelligence (Al).; [0021] The onboard computer may act in response to data collected by onboard data gathering devices, remote instructions or algorithms. Its response may include controllably adjusting water upwelling and downwelling rates in real time, scheduling periods of operation and non-operation to maximise environmental benefits whilst minimising risk as well as assist in emptying the water column thereof for retrieval procedures.; [0037] According to a third aspect of this disclosure, there is provided a method of oceanic carbon capture including: a. Providing a VTD having a floating superstructure supporting an upwelling tube of adjustable length; b. locating the VTD in a body of open water; c. operating the VTD to capture and/or receive data relating to the biochemistry of the body of water and to water current directions and speeds; d. responsive to said data, identifying a target zone of water to which to relocate the VTD; e. adjusting the length of the tube thereby to steer the VTD to the target zone using a prevailing current; and f. causing upwelling of water from the zone, for altering the nutrient profile in the target zone and capturing atmospheric carbon compounds at the air/water interface; [0049] The system is configured for selective computerized control of the VTDs effecting the water transfer. Control of a VTD may be by way of an onboard computer, which operates autonomously to collect data and monitor and guide operations of the VTD based on the data, or may be by way of operating instructions sent from a remote computer at a control centre to the on-board computer. In the latter case, the instructions may in predetermined circumstances override certain instructions generated by the on-board computer. The control centre may be land based, or aboard a ship or a satellite.; [0053] the differentiating characteristics of surface layer 12 compared with surface layer surrounding it may, without limitation, include temperature, density, chemical components such as nutrients and the like. The resulting altered condition of the water in surface layer 12 is favourable for promoting healthy development and growth of aquatic species found within or introduced into this layer. The aquatic species may, without limitation, include primary producers such as fish. The chemical species that may be transported with the upwelling or downwelling water include without limitation chlorophyll a (or “Chi a”, the universal proxy for phytoplankton biomass), dissolved oxygen, carbon, calcium, phosphate, nitrates and species influencing acidity (as measured in terms of pH).);
and transmitting the first set of instructions to a first Internet of Things (IoT) device associated with the upwelling apparatus, wherein the first IoT device executes the first set of instructions; ([00121] The free-drifting VTDs circumnavigate the oceans, flowing generally with the currents they encounter. However, should control be required, for example to disable the activity of a VTD due to an excess of nutrients or an unfavourable ratio of nutrients in the garden zone of deployment, or due to the device inadvertently floating towards a marine park or other restricted area, the controls may be activated from control centre 100 to send instructions that override prevailing commands being transmitted from the onboard computer 112. For example, control actions may include: a. Engaging energy-saving algorithms or manual override to prioritise and control sensor operations. This may include temporarily switching off a sensor or reducing the frequency of its measurements or communications. b. Automatically applying controls if unfavourable environmental conditions occur, such as toxic algal blooms. Controls may include temporarily disabling all or a subset of VTDs in a concert of such devices, to restore nutrient balance prior to resuming upwelling. c. Controlling buoyancy of the water column by injecting salt or air bubbles at selected depth locations. d. Applying control on to a targeted subset of VTDs within a cluster or concert, based on GPS locations and sensor readings. This may be done to achieve uniform distribution of temperature and nutrients in a marine farming area, or to deliberately create different distribution areas for comparative testing. e. Controlling water upwelling or downwelling speed by disabling some of the valve flaps in embodiment utilising the Venetian type valve design.);
and relocating the upwelling apparatus to the submerged location proximate to the candidate underwater source and performing the upwelling movement of water containing the chemical compound from the candidate underwater source toward the floating farm responsive to execution of the first set of instructions. ([0037] According to a third aspect of this disclosure, there is provided a method of oceanic carbon capture including: a. Providing a VTD having a floating superstructure supporting an upwelling tube of adjustable length; b. locating the VTD in a body of open water; c. operating the VTD to capture and/or receive data relating to the biochemistry of the body of water and to water current directions and speeds; d. responsive to said data, identifying a target zone of water to which to relocate the VTD; e. adjusting the length of the tube thereby to steer the VTD to the target zone using a prevailing current; and f. causing upwelling of water from the zone, for altering the nutrient profile in the target zone and capturing atmospheric carbon compounds at the air/water interface).
Novak doesn’t teach:
performing a cost-benefit analysis using the value of the chemical compound and a cost of using the chemical compound in operation of the floating farm; determining, by the cost-benefit analysis: that a relocation of an upwelling apparatus to a submerged location proximate to the candidate underwater source is justified;
and that a relocation of the floating farm to a surface location on the water body corresponding to the submerged location is justified;
generating, a first set of instructions, wherein: responsive to determining that the relocation of the upwelling apparatus is justified,
Lewis teaches:
and that a relocation of the floating farm to a surface location on the water body corresponding to the submerged location is justified; ([Abstract] The present invention relates to an easy-to-move modular smart farm to provide excellent spatial utilization.; [0041] General design criterion for the rafts 108 includes: The use of biodegradable materials which, in case they break up in a storm or flood event, will damage neither the local environment where they were deployed, nor downstream ecotones; A flexible module raft substructure that can be grouped and easily relocated and/or designed to be unfurled from a spiral and deployed as bank stabilization or coastal protection; A mix of ‘dumb’ and ‘smart’ rafts that maximize nutrient uptake at key point source pollution locations, while minimizing the cost and risk; [0047] The derivative or complementary mariculture and aquaculture technologies, for which the invention can be employed include: Macroalgae and microalgae farming (for food, food supplements, animal feed, pharmaceuticals, and biofuels); Floating shellfish farms that dramatically improve water quality; Large scale off-shore seaweed farming that incorporates ocean macro systems like upwelling; Floating solar and/or wave energy harvesting; Wastewater treatment wetlands that harvest urban pollution and restore aquatic habitat while building coastal biomass; Coastal protection island and reef systems that harnessing the power of oyster reefs and existing tidal forces; Over-the-horizon offshore wind farms that can provide complementary infrastructure and services for semi-automated mariculture stations.);
generating, a first set of instructions, wherein: responsive to determining that the relocation of the upwelling apparatus is justified, ([Abstract] The present invention relates to an easy-to-move modular smart farm to provide excellent spatial utilization.; [0041] A flexible module raft substructure that can be grouped and easily relocated; [0073] Stored on any one or on a combination of computer readable media, the illustrative embodiments of the present inventions can include software for controlling the devices and subsystems of the illustrative embodiments, for driving the devices and subsystems of the illustrative embodiments, for enabling the devices and subsystems of the illustrative embodiments to interact with a human user, and the like. Such software can include, but is not limited to, device drivers, firmware, operating systems, development tools, applications software, and the like.; [0074] As stated above, the devices and subsystems of the illustrative embodiments can include computer readable medium or memories for holding instructions programmed according to the teachings of the present inventions and for holding data structures, tables, records, and/or other data described herein. Computer readable medium can include any suitable medium that participates in providing instructions to a processor for execution.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine Novak with Lewis’ feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to provide for controlled movement of the raft (Lewis; [0011]). By incorporating the teachings of Lewis, one would’ve been able to generate instructions to move the floating farm, responsive to the relocation being justified, and move the floating farm to a different location.
Lewis doesn’t teach:
performing a cost-benefit analysis using the value of the chemical compound and a cost of using the chemical compound in operation of the floating farm; determining, by the cost-benefit analysis: that a relocation of an upwelling apparatus to a submerged location proximate to the candidate underwater source is justified;
Johnson teaches:
performing a cost-benefit analysis using the value of the chemical compound and a cost of using the chemical compound in operation of the floating farm; ([Abstract] The mariculture device is suspended vertically in the ocean such that one end of the main duct is in surface water and the other end in relatively deep water that is cold, nutrient rich and relatively fresh in comparison to the surface water which is relatively warm, relatively nutrient deficient and relatively saline.; [Column 2, Lines 47-52] Against the foregoing background it is therefore a general object of the invention to provide a novel upwelling in the ocean which does not run on fuel shipped to the site and furnishes fertilizer in a practical, cost-effective manner to render marifarming a commercially viable venture.);
determining, by the cost-benefit analysis: that a relocation of an upwelling apparatus to a submerged location proximate to the candidate underwater source is justified; ([Abstract] The mariculture device is suspended vertically in the ocean such that one end of the main duct is in surface water and the other end in relatively deep water that is cold, nutrient rich and relatively fresh in comparison to the surface water which is relatively warm, relatively nutrient deficient and relatively saline… A surface water-deep water counterflow is thus established with deep water flowing upwardly through the main duct interior for discharge beyond the upper manifold plate while surface water flows downwardly through the flow segregating tubes for discharge below the lower manifold plate. During such counterflow heat is transferred from the downflowing warm water to the upflowing cold water. The flow is maintained by the difference in density between the deep water and the surface water due to their differences in salinity. The upwelling of nutrient rich deep water is used for marifarming by fertilizing the nutrient deficient surface water.; [Column 2, Lines 47-52] Against the foregoing background it is therefore a general object of the invention to provide a novel upwelling in the ocean which does not run on fuel shipped to the site and furnishes fertilizer in a practical, cost-effective manner to render marifarming a commercially viable venture.; [Column 5, Lines 22-24] The dimensions of the mariculture device 10 can vary depending upon local conditions at the particular location where the device 10 will be used.; [Column 5, Lines 38-44] The exact dimensions of the diameter of the main duct 14 and the spacing between the manifold plates 40, 46 and the cover plates 20, 32 depends on the volumetric flow desired and also on the local conditions. The local conditions will also influence the determination of the exact depth to which the mariculture device 10 is ballasted.; [Column 10, Lines 44-51] The mariculture device 10 thus maintains a desired counterflow by virtue of the difference in density between the surface water and the water at the predetermined depth. Such difference in density is due to the difference in salinity between the surface water and the relatively deep water. Thus a salinity driven oceanographic upwelling is obtained for marifarming at a cost which makes such marifarming feasible.);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine modified Novak with Johnson’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to provide a novel low-cost method of marifarming (Johnson; [Column 2, Lines 53-54]). By incorporating the teachings of Johnson, one would’ve been able to determine if the movement of an upwelling apparatus is justified based on a cost-benefit analysis.
Regarding claims 3/16: Novak doesn’t teach:
generating, a second set of instructions, wherein: responsive to determining that the relocation of the floating farm is justified, the second set of instructions cause activation of a propulsion component of the floating farm to relocate the floating farm to the surface location on the water body corresponding to the submerged location;
transmitting the second set of instructions to a second IoT device associated with the floating farm, wherein the second IoT device executes the second set of instructions;
and relocating the floating farm to the surface location on the water body corresponding to the submerged location responsive to execution of the second set of instructions.
Lewis et al. teaches:
generating, a second set of instructions, wherein: responsive to determining that the relocation of the floating farm is justified, ([Abstract] The present invention relates to an easy-to-move modular smart farm to provide excellent spatial utilization.; [0041] A flexible module raft substructure that can be grouped and easily relocated; [0073] Stored on any one or on a combination of computer readable media, the illustrative embodiments of the present inventions can include software for controlling the devices and subsystems of the illustrative embodiments, for driving the devices and subsystems of the illustrative embodiments, for enabling the devices and subsystems of the illustrative embodiments to interact with a human user, and the like. Such software can include, but is not limited to, device drivers, firmware, operating systems, development tools, applications software, and the like.; [0074] As stated above, the devices and subsystems of the illustrative embodiments can include computer readable medium or memories for holding instructions programmed according to the teachings of the present inventions and for holding data structures, tables, records, and/or other data described herein. Computer readable medium can include any suitable medium that participates in providing instructions to a processor for execution.);
the second set of instructions cause activation of a propulsion component of the floating farm to relocate the floating farm to the surface location on the water body corresponding to the submerged location; ([0010] The system, method and computer program product can include a motor mounted on the raft to drive a propulsion system to actively move and position of the raft.; [0011] The system, method and computer program product can include a propulsion system mounted on the raft to provide for controlled movement of the raft.; [0062] FIG. 7 is a diagram of an enhanced illustrative raft design employing smart elements. In FIG. 7, the system 700 includes an enhanced smart raft 308 configured with additional smart functionality enhancements including global positioning system (GPS) 702, motor 704 and a propulsion device 706, such as a propeller or similar system to drive the raft 308 (e.g; water jet, etc.), and rudder system 708 to steer the raft 308. The GPS, drive, and steering systems are powered by an array of solar panels 710 and allow the rafts to be deployed at specific locations for defined periods of times.);
transmitting the second set of instructions to a second IoT device associated with the floating farm, wherein the second IoT device executes the second set of instructions; ([Fig. 8] Comm Link 804; [0063] FIG. 8 is a diagram showing an array of smart rafts deployed in the evaluation phase at the direction of a sampling drone. In FIG. 8, the system 800 includes an array of smart rafts 308 deployed in the “evaluation phase” at the direction of one or more sampling drones 804 over a suitable communication link 804 to establish water quality conditions in a new or unknown aquatic marine environment.);
and relocating the floating farm to the surface location on the water body corresponding to the submerged location responsive to execution of the second set of instructions. ([0016] The system, method and computer program product can include an array of the rafts deployed under direction of one or more sampling drones.; [0028] Each smart raft is equipped with a water quality sensor (e.g.; a nitrate ion sensor), and the like, connected to a microcontroller that remotely logs data by accessing the internet, and the like, for example, via T-Mobile's GSM network, and the like. smart rafts can be configured with additional smart design elements including global positioning system (GPS), motor, propeller, and rudder system, and the like, powered by an array of solar panels, and the like, to allow the rafts to be deployed at specific locations.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine modified Novak with Lewis’ feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to steer the raft into desired positions (Lewis; [0012]). By incorporating the teachings of Lewis, one would’ve been able to relocate the floating farm.
Regarding claims 10: Novak further teaches:
wherein the cost of using the chemical compound is a cost of using the chemical compound in a future crop growth stage in the operation of the floating farm. ([008] The AUP can be either anchored, or free drifting. The anchored AUPs are fixed in a location, and may be utilised in applications such as bringing cold water to cool a reef environment or to supply nutrients for marine permaculture farm. On the other hand, the free-drifting AUPs behave like satellites in the ocean: They traverse large zones of deep ocean, held in by the ocean currents they are deployed in. The free-drifting AUP is constructed to pump water from target depths within the mesopelagic layer of a particular ocean region, where the nutrients required to facilitate phytoplankton growth are found.; [009] The upwelling tube and its support structure including the float are fabricated to reach a total target depth from which water is to be forced upwards in an artificial upwelling current.; [0010] The efficiency of the ALIPs, whether anchored or free drifting, is measured in terms of the upwelling rate achieved, relative to the cost of AUP production.; [0049] the term “vertical transfer device” or VTD is used, in preference to the more limiting term “artificial upwelling pump” or AUP.).
Regarding claims 11: Novak further teaches:
a cost of using the chemical compound in a current crop growth stage in the operation of the floating farm. ([0010] The efficiency of the ALIPs, whether anchored or free drifting, is measured in terms of the upwelling rate achieved, relative to the cost of AUP production.).
Claims 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novak et al. (WO 2024031156 A1, hereinafter “Novak”), in view of Lewis et al. (US 20210164954 A1, hereinafter “Lewis”), in further view of Johnson (US 4597360 A, hereinafter “Johnson”) as applied to claims 1/14 above, in further view of Pramana et al. (2024). 'Application of fuzzy logic in decision-making process for relocation of floating net cages in river fish farming', Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 10(1), pp. 117-132. (hereinafter “Pramana”).
Regarding claims 4/17: Novak doesn’t explicitly teach:
mapping, to produce a map as a part of the analyzing, a set of candidate underwater locations, the candidate underwater source being a member of the set of candidate underwater locations, wherein each member of the set of candidate underwater locations has a corresponding density of the chemical compound being emitted, the map depicting densities and distribution of the chemical compound over an underwater area.
Pramana teaches:
mapping, to produce a map as a part of the analyzing, a set of candidate underwater locations, the candidate underwater source being a member of the set of candidate underwater locations, wherein each member of the set of candidate underwater locations has a corresponding density of the chemical compound being emitted, the map depicting densities and distribution of the chemical compound over an underwater area. ([Fig. 2] Geographic location of the study area and the test location in the Musi River; [Table 3] Measurement results of water quality and recommended status: Location Code, Coordinate, Average Value, Recommended FNC Status).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine modified Novak and Pramana with Pramana’s additional feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to develop an early warning system for water quality and create a decision-making program as a reference for fishermen to relocate floating net cages when the river water quality deteriorates (Pramana; [Abstract]). By incorporating the teachings of Pramana, one would’ve been able to produce a map of candidate locations based on the corresponding density of the chemical compound.
Regarding claims 5: Novak further teaches:
forecasting a duration of viability corresponding to the candidate underwater source; ([00139] Variations in these prevailing and local currents at different ocean depths produce a range of feasible pump trajectories which can be exploited, affording a mechanism for approximate control of the pump over a long time period.);
Novak doesn’t teach:
and using, in the cost-benefit analysis, the duration.
Pramana teaches:
and using, in the cost-benefit analysis, the duration. ([Page 128] fish farmers can make an informed decision on relocating the floating net cages based on factors such as time, water conditions, and the specific species being cultivated.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine modified Novak and Pramana with Pramana’s additional feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to make decisions for FNC transfer with a monitoring application that displays value data and graphics and is equipped with a database (Pramana; [Page 128]). By incorporating the teachings of Pramana, one would’ve been able to produce a map of candidate locations based on the corresponding density of the chemical compound.
Regarding claims 8: Novak further teaches:
forecasting a future crop growth stage in the operation of the floating farm, wherein the chemical compound is a nutrient for the future crop growth stage. ([008] The AUP can be either anchored, or free drifting. The anchored AUPs are fixed in a location, and may be utilised in applications such as bringing cold water to cool a reef environment or to supply nutrients for marine permaculture farm. On the other hand, the free-drifting AUPs behave like satellites in the ocean: They traverse large zones of deep ocean, held in by the ocean currents they are deployed in. The free-drifting AUP is constructed to pump water from target depths within the mesopelagic layer of a particular ocean region, where the nutrients required to facilitate phytoplankton growth are found.).
Regarding claims 9: Novak further teaches:
Wherein the cost of using the chemical compound in the operation of the floating farm comprises: a cost of relocating the floating farm to the surface location in the water body corresponding to the submerged location from where the chemical compound can be upwelled from the candidate underwater source, ([00142] Optimisation algorithms executed in the control centre would predict the energy cost of navigation and commence energy savings in preparation for the navigation.);
and a cost of relocating the upwelling apparatus to the submerged location in the water body from where the chemical compound can be upwelled from the candidate underwater source. ([0010] The efficiency of the ALIPs, whether anchored or free drifting, is measured in terms of the upwelling rate achieved, relative to the cost of AUP production.).
Regarding claims 12: Novak further teaches:
and the cost of using the chemical compound in the operation of the floating farm for the period; ([0010] The efficiency of the ALIPs, whether anchored or free drifting, is measured in terms of the upwelling rate achieved, relative to the cost of AUP production.; [0021] The onboard computer may act in response to data collected by onboard data gathering devices, remote instructions or algorithms. Its response may include controllably adjusting water upwelling and downwelling rates in real time, scheduling periods of operation and non-operation to maximise environmental benefits whilst minimising risk as well as assist in emptying the water column thereof for retrieval procedures.).
Novak doesn’t teach:
computing, as a part of performing the cost-benefit analysis, a ratio of the value of the chemical compound over a period
and determining that the ratio is at least equal to a threshold ratio.
Pramana teaches:
computing, as a part of performing the cost-benefit analysis, a ratio of the value of the chemical compound over a period ([Table 3] Average Value, Measurement Duration);
and determining that the ratio is at least equal to a threshold ratio. ([Abstract] the program output recommends floating net cage owners to either “Stay in position” or “Move.” Water quality warnings that exceed the upper and lower threshold limits are displayed using light-emitting diode indicators and a buzzer.; [Table 1] Parameter, Lower threshold value, Upper threshold value; [Page 121] Based on these regulatory standards, threshold values for the three main water quality parameters were established in this study, as shown in Table 1. The upper and lower threshold values presented in Table 1 serve as references for the developed program and device. The alarm system provides early warnings.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine modified Novak and Pramana with additional Pramana’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to facilitate fishermen in accurately monitoring real-time water conditions around the FNC cultivation site. (Pramana; [Page 122]). By incorporating the teachings of Pramana, one would’ve been able to use thresholds to determine whether to move the farm or not.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novak et al. (WO 2024031156 A1, hereinafter “Novak”), in view of Lewis et al. (US 20210164954 A1, hereinafter “Lewis”), in further view of Johnson (US 4597360 A, hereinafter “Johnson”) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Luo et al. (US 20230259872 A1, hereinafter “Luo”), in further view of Hansen et al. (US 20200300700 A1, hereinafter “Hansen”).
Regarding claims 6: Novak further teaches:
receiving the first sensor data from a submersible robotic sensing apparatus, ([0029] In an embodiment, the data collection devices include sensors capable of collecting data relating to water condition.; [0088] The sensors are placed on the joining rings across the water column).
Novak doesn’t teach:
wherein the submersible robotic sensing apparatus is monitoring light reflecting from an emission of the candidate underwater source.
Hansen teaches:
wherein the submersible robotic sensing apparatus is monitoring light reflecting from an emission of the candidate underwater source. ([0009] Multispectral sensors usually have more than three discrete color bands, and so give more detailed spectral information compared to regular digital color cameras. They have typically been carried by satellites, airplanes, buoys and boats to analyze upwelling radiance remotely, and in underwater vehicles to measure both upwelling and downwelling radiance in situ. In the first case, the light measured by the sensor comes from natural illumination that is incident on the water (passive remote sensing), while in the latter case, lamps for illumination is carried alongside the sensor (active remote sensing). Hyperspectral sensors have better wavelength resolution and more wavebands than multispectral sensors. One of ordinary skill in the art would’ve reasonably considered the submersible robotic sensing apparatus as equivalent to an underwater vehicle.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine modified Novak and Pramana with Hansen’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to acquire more spectral information about the scene than multi-spectral and standard color cameras (Hansen; [0009]). By incorporating the teachings of Hansen, one would’ve been able to measure underwater light using a submersible robotic sensing apparatus.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novak et al. (WO 2024031156 A1, hereinafter “Novak”), in view of Lewis et al. (US 20210164954 A1, hereinafter “Lewis”), in further view of Johnson (US 4597360 A, hereinafter “Johnson”) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Luo et al. (US 20230259872 A1, hereinafter “Luo”), in further view of in further view of Kirk J. T. O. (1989), The upwelling light stream in natural waters, Limnology and Oceanography (hereinafter “Kirk”).
Regarding claims 7: Novak further teaches:
receiving the first sensor data from a space-based satellite sensing apparatus, ([0099] transmitting the data it collects from sensors 60 via satellite-enabled wireless communication to a control centre 100 (refer to Figure 11).)
Novak doesn’t teach:
wherein the satellite sensing apparatus is monitoring light reflecting from a surface of the water body, an emission of the candidate underwater source reaching said surface.
Kirk teaches:
wherein the satellite sensing apparatus is monitoring light reflecting from a surface of the water body, an emission of the candidate underwater source reaching said surface. ([Abstract] the upwelling light field in natural waters is of great importance for the appearance of the waterbodies, for visibility of objects seen through the water, and for remote sensing of water properties.; [Page 1410] The water-leaving radiance—the upwelling light stream which has escaped through the surface—is the quantity analyzed in the remote sensing or water composition from space satellites or planes (Gordon and Morel 1983). The visibility of (light-colored) objects within the water, as seen from above, is reduced by the upwelling light stream. The inherent visual contrast of the submerged object varies inversely with irradiance reflectance (Preisendorfer 1986; Hojerslev 1986). In turbid inland waters, which can have irradiance reflectance values of 1 O-20%, the upwelling flux is a significant proportion of the total light available for photosynthesis.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine modified Novak and Pramana with Kirk’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to remotely sense water composition (Kirk; [Page 1410]). By incorporating the teachings of Kirk, one would’ve been able to use satellites to monitor light escaping the surface of the body of water.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novak et al. (WO 2024031156 A1, hereinafter “Novak”), in view of Lewis et al. (US 20210164954 A1, hereinafter “Lewis”), in further view of Johnson (US 4597360 A, hereinafter “Johnson”) as applied to claim 14 above, in further view of Luo et al. (US 20230259872 A1, hereinafter “Luo”).
Regarding claims 18: Novak doesn’t teach:
wherein the program instructions are stored in a computer readable storage device in a data processing system,
and wherein the program instructions are transferred over a network from a remote data processing system.
Luo teaches:
wherein the program instructions are stored in a computer readable storage device in a data processing system, ([Claim 12] wherein the stored program instructions are stored in a computer readable storage device in a data processing system);
and wherein the program instructions are transferred over a network from a remote data processing system. ([Claim 12] and wherein the stored program instructions are transferred over a network from a remote data processing system.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine modified Novak with Luo’s feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, other programmable apparatus or other device to produce a computer implemented process (Luo; [0215]). By incorporating the teachings of Luo, one would’ve been able to store instructions in a computer readable storage device in a data processing system and transfer them over a network.
Regarding claims 19: Novak doesn’t teach:
wherein the program instructions are stored in a computer readable storage device in a server data processing system, and wherein the program instructions are downloaded in response to a request over a network to a remote data processing system for use in a computer readable storage device associated with the remote data processing system,
further comprising: program instructions to meter use of the program instructions associated with the request; and program instructions to generate an invoice based on the metered use.
Luo teaches:
wherein the program instructions are stored in a computer readable storage device in a server data processing system, and wherein the program instructions are downloaded in response to a request over a network to a remote data processing system for use in a computer readable storage device associated with the remote data processing system, ([Claim 13] wherein the stored program instructions are stored in a computer readable storage device in a server data processing system, and wherein the stored program instructions are downloaded in response to a request over a network to a remote data processing system for use in a computer readable storage device associated with the remote data processing system);
further comprising: program instructions to meter use of the program instructions associated with the request; and program instructions to generate an invoice based on the metered use. ([Claim 13] further comprising: program instructions to meter use of the program instructions associated with the request; and program instructions to generate an invoice based on the metered use.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant’s invention, to combine modified Novak with Luo’s additional feature(s) listed above. One would’ve been motivated to do so in order to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, other programmable apparatus or other device to produce a computer implemented process (Luo; [0215]). By incorporating the teachings of Luo, one would’ve been able to store instructions in a computer readable storage device in a server processing system and transfer them over a network to a remote data processing system, meter the use of the instructions associated with the request, and generate an invoice based on the metered use.
Allowable Over Existing Prior Art
Regarding Claim 13: the claims are rendered neither obvious nor anticipated by the available field of prior art.
Guerra (US 12372408 B2), filed on June 6, 2022, teaches:
wherein the third IoT device executes the third set of instructions; ([Column 2, Lines 13-17] The invention herein also provides an electronic device for a marine drone system, comprising a processor and a memory. The memory contains instructions stored thereon, wherein said instructions, once executed perform the steps of: initiating a hover mode of flight).
and relocating the sensing apparatus to the location proximate to the candidate underwater source responsive to execution of the third set of instructions. ([Fig. 13] Flight Data 326; [Column 7, Lines 46-49] Included in another graphic overlay on the screen 52 will be flight data 326 as shown in FIG. 13, including but not limited to height 330 of drone 10 and sensors, and GPS speed 332 over the ground.; [Column 6, Lines 54-67] the UAV's GPS module 120 is used in combination with other sensors to relay coordinates for conditions. That is, the GPS module 120 can relay the coordinates of a bird, fish, flotsam weed line, or similar object. A laser module 110 is used to send a beam of light to detect the exact distance of the object from the UAV 10. Once the distance is calculated, the degree of the beam, and the polar direction of the beam, the GPS module 120 can compile the data and associate it with a set of coordinates, which may then be displayed on the user's screen module 52. This is helpful in detecting exactly where fish are located, as a user will either have a GPS 120 built into the watercraft, or a GPS 142C built into the base 30 and/or screen 52 module.
Kapetanovićet et al. Heterogeneous Autonomous Robotic System in Viticulture and Mariculture: Vehicles Development and Systems Integration. Sensors (Basel). 2022 Apr 12 teaches:
transmitting the third set of instructions to a third Internet of Things (IoT) device associated with the sensing apparatus, ([5.2 Underwater Acoustic Localization System] Control of the ROV by the ASV requires position feedback. In the underwater environment, this means using an acoustic localization system in most cases because electromagnetic waves are highly attenuated. Since the horizontal plane dimensions of the ASV Korkyra are 2000×1000 mm, using a range-based short baseline (SBL) system with transducers placed at four corners of the ASV (or even wider) is a better choice than an ultra-short baseline (USBL) system. SBL systems use trilateration of range measurements from the bottomside unit relative to the topside transponders to determine the relative position of the underwater vehicle relative to the surface vehicle. With a larger baseline, the SBL underwater localization system is less sensitive to range measurement noise.
However, the prior art of the record does not teach the claim limitation of: determining, by the cost-benefit analysis, that a relocation of a sensing apparatus to a location proximate to the candidate underwater source is justified. Regarding the limitation for generating, a third set of instructions, wherein: responsive to determining that the relocation of the sensing apparatus is justified, the third set of instructions cause activation of a propulsion component of the sensing apparatus to relocate the sensing apparatus to the location proximate to the candidate underwater source; Guerra teaches: [Column 2, Lines 13-33] The invention herein also provides an electronic device for a marine drone system, comprising a processor and a memory. The memory contains instructions stored thereon, wherein said instructions, once executed perform the steps of: initiating a hover mode of flight, selecting at least one mode including following mode and sense mode, and obtaining a video feed from a PTZ camera if follow mode is selected, wherein once said video feed is obtained, said mode initiating a tracking function whereby said tracking function will track a watercraft, stream video of said tracking, display said video feed on a display screen of a graphic user interface. The instructions further include the steps of providing a list of additional functions if sense mode is selected, including options for monitoring water temperature, monitoring water depth, monitoring objects, and streaming video, wherein said monitoring water temperature includes obtaining an output from an IR camera, said monitoring water depth includes obtaining an output from a LIDAR sensor, said monitoring objects includes obtaining an output from a radar, and said streaming video includes obtaining an output from a PTZ camera. However, Guerra doesn’t teach the generation of the third set of instructions responsive to determining that the relocation of the sensing apparatus is justified. Therefore, the limitations is not taught in its entirety.
Therefore, claim 13 is rendered neither obvious nor anticipated by the available field of prior art. The claims overcome the prior art of record such that none of the cited prior art references can be applied to form the basis of a 35 USC 102 rejection nor can they be combined to fairly suggest in combination, the basis of a 35 USC 103 rejection when the limitations are read in the particular environment of the claims. Therefore, the claims may be allowable if amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 USC 112(b), as set forth above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Lee et al. (WO 2019103209 A1), which discloses: a drone performs marine monitoring process with oil leakage/red tide, large marine accidents/disaster generation including sub-tense/ cold pool appearance/low salinity appearance/vessel accident, so that damage detection of the vessel/marine structure can be performed during monitoring with automatic aviation.
Villamar et al. (US 20230404002 A1), which discloses water quality sensors 112 can both help to identify where these discharges are occurring, as well as how much uptake is occurring from the aquatic grasses 104 integral to the rafts 108.
Staehler (WO 2023057481 A1), which discloses computer-implemented aquaculture farm management method comprising determining, by the computer, at least one management demand signal for the aquaculture pond on the basis of the aerial parameter of use and the regional management parameter. Where the aerial parameter of use may particularly be based on aerial sensor data acquired by at least one air-based sensor that may be located on a satellite, an airplane or a drone.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL J TORRES CHANZA whose telephone number is (571)272-3701. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8am - 5pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Epstein can be reached on (571)270-5389. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/G.J.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3625
/BRIAN M EPSTEIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3625
Prosecution Insights